What is GPS' 19 year rollover and does it present a cybersecurity issue?Does GPS spoofing ever come from space? How are spoofings usually detected?How far up have satellites used a GNSS for positioning, and how does the precision degrade with altitude?Does GPS work at ISS?How does GPS receiver synchronize time with GPS satellites?How does GPS work exactly?Why are the GPS constellation satellites in such a high orbit?How does GPS module gets time even before a fix?What is the magnetic equatorial anomaly and how is GAGAN unique in its ability to compensate?TLE and RINEX gps differencesWhat are RAIM Service Outage, RNP and EnRoute on GPS DOP maps? What does the red line mean?Does GPS spoofing ever come from space? How are spoofings usually detected?
Meaning of "individuandum"
If Melisandre foresaw another character closing blue eyes, why did she follow Stannis?
CRT Oscilloscope - part of the plot is missing
Why do freehub and cassette have only one position that matches?
What is the most remote airport from the center of the city it supposedly serves?
When and why did journal article titles become descriptive, rather than creatively allusive?
Survey Confirmation - Emphasize the question or the answer?
Unidentified items in bicycle tube repair kit
Any examples of headwear for races with animal ears?
Hang 20lb projector screen on Hardieplank
Feels like I am getting dragged into office politics
Visa for volunteering in England
Why are there synthetic chemicals in our bodies? Where do they come from?
Why is the SNP putting so much emphasis on currency plans?
Why do money exchangers give different rates to different bills
Why are notes ordered like they are on a piano?
Password expiration with Password manager
GPU memory requirements of a model
Was Unix ever a single-user OS?
Is it legal to define an unnamed struct?
My ID is expired, can I fly to the Bahamas with my passport
How did Captain America use this power?
Copy line and insert it in a new position with sed or awk
Is it the same airport YUL and YMQ in Canada?
What is GPS' 19 year rollover and does it present a cybersecurity issue?
Does GPS spoofing ever come from space? How are spoofings usually detected?How far up have satellites used a GNSS for positioning, and how does the precision degrade with altitude?Does GPS work at ISS?How does GPS receiver synchronize time with GPS satellites?How does GPS work exactly?Why are the GPS constellation satellites in such a high orbit?How does GPS module gets time even before a fix?What is the magnetic equatorial anomaly and how is GAGAN unique in its ability to compensate?TLE and RINEX gps differencesWhat are RAIM Service Outage, RNP and EnRoute on GPS DOP maps? What does the red line mean?Does GPS spoofing ever come from space? How are spoofings usually detected?
$begingroup$
The NPR new item and audio podcast The Global Positioning System Resets talks about a 19 year cycling of something in the GPS system, but it's not clear what it is.
Every 19 years, the Global Positioning System resets a measure of time built into its program. The latest rollover is Saturday and NPR's Scott Simon asks cybersecurity expert Frank Cilluffo about it.
It's Y2K for GPS. The Global Positioning System was designed with a limit for the number of weeks it could count. Every 19 years, the program reaches that limit and the count resets. That happens tonight. What might happen tonight? Frank Cilluffo is director of the McCrary Institute for Critical Infrastructure Protection and Cyber Systems. He joins us now from the campus of Auburn University. Thanks so much for being with us.
- What is it exactly that cycles or "rolls over" every 19 years?
- Is it in any way analogous to y2k?
- Is there any cybersecurity issue associated with the rollover more subtle than GPS simply not working for some users? For example, is there some hacking potential associated with this moment?
gps gnss
$endgroup$
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
The NPR new item and audio podcast The Global Positioning System Resets talks about a 19 year cycling of something in the GPS system, but it's not clear what it is.
Every 19 years, the Global Positioning System resets a measure of time built into its program. The latest rollover is Saturday and NPR's Scott Simon asks cybersecurity expert Frank Cilluffo about it.
It's Y2K for GPS. The Global Positioning System was designed with a limit for the number of weeks it could count. Every 19 years, the program reaches that limit and the count resets. That happens tonight. What might happen tonight? Frank Cilluffo is director of the McCrary Institute for Critical Infrastructure Protection and Cyber Systems. He joins us now from the campus of Auburn University. Thanks so much for being with us.
- What is it exactly that cycles or "rolls over" every 19 years?
- Is it in any way analogous to y2k?
- Is there any cybersecurity issue associated with the rollover more subtle than GPS simply not working for some users? For example, is there some hacking potential associated with this moment?
gps gnss
$endgroup$
3
$begingroup$
@JörgWMittag you are right, it last happened in 1999. However, the prevalence and use of GPS back then was nothing like it is now.
$endgroup$
– Darren
Apr 8 at 16:51
1
$begingroup$
@JörgWMittag in fact, that is stated in the article. Also, as per my answer, the date itself may not be a problem, but going forward various receivers may experience problems at unknown and seeminly arbitrary dates.
$endgroup$
– Darren
Apr 8 at 18:23
1
$begingroup$
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
$endgroup$
– called2voyage♦
Apr 9 at 16:32
1
$begingroup$
Delorme did this. They rolled over sometime in the summer of 2018. As a navigation user, I didn't notice it while using my GPS on a 1 week trip. It mucks up the track data however, and you have to do date math, or use a program like GPSBabel to fix the dates. Garmin has since released firmware version 3.7 which fixes the problem.
$endgroup$
– Sherwood Botsford
Apr 12 at 15:36
1
$begingroup$
I didn't need to use GPSbabel, as the track data wasn't date crucial. I haven't checked the GPS to see if data that was on it was modified. I don't think it would be.
$endgroup$
– Sherwood Botsford
Apr 13 at 22:06
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
The NPR new item and audio podcast The Global Positioning System Resets talks about a 19 year cycling of something in the GPS system, but it's not clear what it is.
Every 19 years, the Global Positioning System resets a measure of time built into its program. The latest rollover is Saturday and NPR's Scott Simon asks cybersecurity expert Frank Cilluffo about it.
It's Y2K for GPS. The Global Positioning System was designed with a limit for the number of weeks it could count. Every 19 years, the program reaches that limit and the count resets. That happens tonight. What might happen tonight? Frank Cilluffo is director of the McCrary Institute for Critical Infrastructure Protection and Cyber Systems. He joins us now from the campus of Auburn University. Thanks so much for being with us.
- What is it exactly that cycles or "rolls over" every 19 years?
- Is it in any way analogous to y2k?
- Is there any cybersecurity issue associated with the rollover more subtle than GPS simply not working for some users? For example, is there some hacking potential associated with this moment?
gps gnss
$endgroup$
The NPR new item and audio podcast The Global Positioning System Resets talks about a 19 year cycling of something in the GPS system, but it's not clear what it is.
Every 19 years, the Global Positioning System resets a measure of time built into its program. The latest rollover is Saturday and NPR's Scott Simon asks cybersecurity expert Frank Cilluffo about it.
It's Y2K for GPS. The Global Positioning System was designed with a limit for the number of weeks it could count. Every 19 years, the program reaches that limit and the count resets. That happens tonight. What might happen tonight? Frank Cilluffo is director of the McCrary Institute for Critical Infrastructure Protection and Cyber Systems. He joins us now from the campus of Auburn University. Thanks so much for being with us.
- What is it exactly that cycles or "rolls over" every 19 years?
- Is it in any way analogous to y2k?
- Is there any cybersecurity issue associated with the rollover more subtle than GPS simply not working for some users? For example, is there some hacking potential associated with this moment?
gps gnss
gps gnss
edited Apr 8 at 3:19
uhoh
asked Apr 8 at 3:01
uhohuhoh
41.6k19160525
41.6k19160525
3
$begingroup$
@JörgWMittag you are right, it last happened in 1999. However, the prevalence and use of GPS back then was nothing like it is now.
$endgroup$
– Darren
Apr 8 at 16:51
1
$begingroup$
@JörgWMittag in fact, that is stated in the article. Also, as per my answer, the date itself may not be a problem, but going forward various receivers may experience problems at unknown and seeminly arbitrary dates.
$endgroup$
– Darren
Apr 8 at 18:23
1
$begingroup$
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
$endgroup$
– called2voyage♦
Apr 9 at 16:32
1
$begingroup$
Delorme did this. They rolled over sometime in the summer of 2018. As a navigation user, I didn't notice it while using my GPS on a 1 week trip. It mucks up the track data however, and you have to do date math, or use a program like GPSBabel to fix the dates. Garmin has since released firmware version 3.7 which fixes the problem.
$endgroup$
– Sherwood Botsford
Apr 12 at 15:36
1
$begingroup$
I didn't need to use GPSbabel, as the track data wasn't date crucial. I haven't checked the GPS to see if data that was on it was modified. I don't think it would be.
$endgroup$
– Sherwood Botsford
Apr 13 at 22:06
|
show 2 more comments
3
$begingroup$
@JörgWMittag you are right, it last happened in 1999. However, the prevalence and use of GPS back then was nothing like it is now.
$endgroup$
– Darren
Apr 8 at 16:51
1
$begingroup$
@JörgWMittag in fact, that is stated in the article. Also, as per my answer, the date itself may not be a problem, but going forward various receivers may experience problems at unknown and seeminly arbitrary dates.
$endgroup$
– Darren
Apr 8 at 18:23
1
$begingroup$
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
$endgroup$
– called2voyage♦
Apr 9 at 16:32
1
$begingroup$
Delorme did this. They rolled over sometime in the summer of 2018. As a navigation user, I didn't notice it while using my GPS on a 1 week trip. It mucks up the track data however, and you have to do date math, or use a program like GPSBabel to fix the dates. Garmin has since released firmware version 3.7 which fixes the problem.
$endgroup$
– Sherwood Botsford
Apr 12 at 15:36
1
$begingroup$
I didn't need to use GPSbabel, as the track data wasn't date crucial. I haven't checked the GPS to see if data that was on it was modified. I don't think it would be.
$endgroup$
– Sherwood Botsford
Apr 13 at 22:06
3
3
$begingroup$
@JörgWMittag you are right, it last happened in 1999. However, the prevalence and use of GPS back then was nothing like it is now.
$endgroup$
– Darren
Apr 8 at 16:51
$begingroup$
@JörgWMittag you are right, it last happened in 1999. However, the prevalence and use of GPS back then was nothing like it is now.
$endgroup$
– Darren
Apr 8 at 16:51
1
1
$begingroup$
@JörgWMittag in fact, that is stated in the article. Also, as per my answer, the date itself may not be a problem, but going forward various receivers may experience problems at unknown and seeminly arbitrary dates.
$endgroup$
– Darren
Apr 8 at 18:23
$begingroup$
@JörgWMittag in fact, that is stated in the article. Also, as per my answer, the date itself may not be a problem, but going forward various receivers may experience problems at unknown and seeminly arbitrary dates.
$endgroup$
– Darren
Apr 8 at 18:23
1
1
$begingroup$
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
$endgroup$
– called2voyage♦
Apr 9 at 16:32
$begingroup$
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
$endgroup$
– called2voyage♦
Apr 9 at 16:32
1
1
$begingroup$
Delorme did this. They rolled over sometime in the summer of 2018. As a navigation user, I didn't notice it while using my GPS on a 1 week trip. It mucks up the track data however, and you have to do date math, or use a program like GPSBabel to fix the dates. Garmin has since released firmware version 3.7 which fixes the problem.
$endgroup$
– Sherwood Botsford
Apr 12 at 15:36
$begingroup$
Delorme did this. They rolled over sometime in the summer of 2018. As a navigation user, I didn't notice it while using my GPS on a 1 week trip. It mucks up the track data however, and you have to do date math, or use a program like GPSBabel to fix the dates. Garmin has since released firmware version 3.7 which fixes the problem.
$endgroup$
– Sherwood Botsford
Apr 12 at 15:36
1
1
$begingroup$
I didn't need to use GPSbabel, as the track data wasn't date crucial. I haven't checked the GPS to see if data that was on it was modified. I don't think it would be.
$endgroup$
– Sherwood Botsford
Apr 13 at 22:06
$begingroup$
I didn't need to use GPSbabel, as the track data wasn't date crucial. I haven't checked the GPS to see if data that was on it was modified. I don't think it would be.
$endgroup$
– Sherwood Botsford
Apr 13 at 22:06
|
show 2 more comments
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
The field in the protocol that specifies the week number is a 10-bit value. In most computers, when an (unsigned) integer exceeds its maximum value, it wraps around to zero. This is roughly similar to Y2K, though is more like the upcoming year 2038 problem (but with weeks instead of seconds). This 10-bit value will wrap around, and the GPS system will hold the same time value as it held back in 1999.
Yes, this can cause some security issues. Many people use GPS signals as a way to tell time instead of its traditional use with geolocation. Accurate time is extremely important for security, such as for verifying that a certificate is valid and has not expired. If an operating system exclusively uses GPS to calibrate its internal clock, this rollover could, if handled improperly in firmware, result in certificate validation errors or even the failure to check for security updates. See also How important is local time for security?.
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
To double check, a GPS receiver unit without properly updated software (or firmware) could return a properly formatted yet incorrect value for GPS time, and this problem is independent of the quality of the geolocation data?
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Apr 8 at 5:10
2
$begingroup$
@uhoh Correct. If that invalid time is used for purposes that require accurate time for security, this could result in a security issue.
$endgroup$
– forest
Apr 8 at 5:12
$begingroup$
thanks! fyi Does GPS spoofing ever come from space? How are spoofings usually detected? is somewhat security-related.
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Apr 8 at 5:24
add a comment |
$begingroup$
@forest’s answer is correct. But what makes the rollover slightly more problematic is that many GPS receiver manufacturers have accounted for it by pre-programming an internal “pivot date” in the firmware. That is, if a receiver was manufactured/programmed in, say, 2015, then there is internal logic that says “if the date appears to be prior to 2015, it’s obviously nonsense so add 1024 to the apparent week number”. This means the receiver will roll over, just some time in the future, 1024 weeks after the pivot date.
There’s a good explanation here.
This means that most receivers will roll over at different times making it hard to plan for. The date, unless known by the manufacturer, needs to be tested for (using a GPS simulator you need to go way in the future, then in the past, until you can narrow down the actual date).
Location based receivers (car sat navs for example) should continue to function (although their date may be wrong unless fixed in firmware). However, the prevalence of NTP, PTP and other time-of-day protocols in the finance, power, telecom and many other industries, the source of which is almost always traceable back to GPS, makes this a potential headache.
Side note: Some equipment I’m aware of actually rolled over earlier than the 6th April 2019 date, back in 2018. I’m aware of at least one large-ish telecoms provider experiencing a major outage because they hadn’t accounted for it. Their switches all started receiving a time way in the past which caused them to crash.
Further side note: New GPS satellites (i.e. those launched since around 2014 or so) also broadcast a 13-bit week number value. Any receivers designed to utilise them won't roll over for 8191 weeks, or 157 years.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
$endgroup$
– called2voyage♦
Apr 9 at 16:36
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Other answers explain the WNRO problem as an overflow/high order truncation/rollover problem.
This is correct.
It is a security issue because services may be impacted. Not all security issues are about data loss. Business continuity is strangely important to people as well.
This type of thing has been going on in the digital world for a while now.
Windows 95, 98 and possibly NT 3.51 would crash on millis rollover after 49.7 days.
The real time clock in many early PC motherboards could only cope with an 8 year range, (3 bits) putting a ceiling on the date (1987 for many 8086's).
Enough has been written about Y2K and tm_year from time.h (which did not rollover but got fat). I recall too we had a post Y2K issue with packed decimal (COMP-3) date arithmetic in point of sale systems world wide.
The important thing is that it is foreseeable, so it should be dealt with by software, almanac data, and appliances that depend upon it.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "508"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fspace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f35362%2fwhat-is-gps-19-year-rollover-and-does-it-present-a-cybersecurity-issue%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
The field in the protocol that specifies the week number is a 10-bit value. In most computers, when an (unsigned) integer exceeds its maximum value, it wraps around to zero. This is roughly similar to Y2K, though is more like the upcoming year 2038 problem (but with weeks instead of seconds). This 10-bit value will wrap around, and the GPS system will hold the same time value as it held back in 1999.
Yes, this can cause some security issues. Many people use GPS signals as a way to tell time instead of its traditional use with geolocation. Accurate time is extremely important for security, such as for verifying that a certificate is valid and has not expired. If an operating system exclusively uses GPS to calibrate its internal clock, this rollover could, if handled improperly in firmware, result in certificate validation errors or even the failure to check for security updates. See also How important is local time for security?.
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
To double check, a GPS receiver unit without properly updated software (or firmware) could return a properly formatted yet incorrect value for GPS time, and this problem is independent of the quality of the geolocation data?
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Apr 8 at 5:10
2
$begingroup$
@uhoh Correct. If that invalid time is used for purposes that require accurate time for security, this could result in a security issue.
$endgroup$
– forest
Apr 8 at 5:12
$begingroup$
thanks! fyi Does GPS spoofing ever come from space? How are spoofings usually detected? is somewhat security-related.
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Apr 8 at 5:24
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The field in the protocol that specifies the week number is a 10-bit value. In most computers, when an (unsigned) integer exceeds its maximum value, it wraps around to zero. This is roughly similar to Y2K, though is more like the upcoming year 2038 problem (but with weeks instead of seconds). This 10-bit value will wrap around, and the GPS system will hold the same time value as it held back in 1999.
Yes, this can cause some security issues. Many people use GPS signals as a way to tell time instead of its traditional use with geolocation. Accurate time is extremely important for security, such as for verifying that a certificate is valid and has not expired. If an operating system exclusively uses GPS to calibrate its internal clock, this rollover could, if handled improperly in firmware, result in certificate validation errors or even the failure to check for security updates. See also How important is local time for security?.
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
To double check, a GPS receiver unit without properly updated software (or firmware) could return a properly formatted yet incorrect value for GPS time, and this problem is independent of the quality of the geolocation data?
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Apr 8 at 5:10
2
$begingroup$
@uhoh Correct. If that invalid time is used for purposes that require accurate time for security, this could result in a security issue.
$endgroup$
– forest
Apr 8 at 5:12
$begingroup$
thanks! fyi Does GPS spoofing ever come from space? How are spoofings usually detected? is somewhat security-related.
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Apr 8 at 5:24
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The field in the protocol that specifies the week number is a 10-bit value. In most computers, when an (unsigned) integer exceeds its maximum value, it wraps around to zero. This is roughly similar to Y2K, though is more like the upcoming year 2038 problem (but with weeks instead of seconds). This 10-bit value will wrap around, and the GPS system will hold the same time value as it held back in 1999.
Yes, this can cause some security issues. Many people use GPS signals as a way to tell time instead of its traditional use with geolocation. Accurate time is extremely important for security, such as for verifying that a certificate is valid and has not expired. If an operating system exclusively uses GPS to calibrate its internal clock, this rollover could, if handled improperly in firmware, result in certificate validation errors or even the failure to check for security updates. See also How important is local time for security?.
$endgroup$
The field in the protocol that specifies the week number is a 10-bit value. In most computers, when an (unsigned) integer exceeds its maximum value, it wraps around to zero. This is roughly similar to Y2K, though is more like the upcoming year 2038 problem (but with weeks instead of seconds). This 10-bit value will wrap around, and the GPS system will hold the same time value as it held back in 1999.
Yes, this can cause some security issues. Many people use GPS signals as a way to tell time instead of its traditional use with geolocation. Accurate time is extremely important for security, such as for verifying that a certificate is valid and has not expired. If an operating system exclusively uses GPS to calibrate its internal clock, this rollover could, if handled improperly in firmware, result in certificate validation errors or even the failure to check for security updates. See also How important is local time for security?.
edited Apr 8 at 4:34
answered Apr 8 at 4:12
forestforest
45116
45116
1
$begingroup$
To double check, a GPS receiver unit without properly updated software (or firmware) could return a properly formatted yet incorrect value for GPS time, and this problem is independent of the quality of the geolocation data?
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Apr 8 at 5:10
2
$begingroup$
@uhoh Correct. If that invalid time is used for purposes that require accurate time for security, this could result in a security issue.
$endgroup$
– forest
Apr 8 at 5:12
$begingroup$
thanks! fyi Does GPS spoofing ever come from space? How are spoofings usually detected? is somewhat security-related.
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Apr 8 at 5:24
add a comment |
1
$begingroup$
To double check, a GPS receiver unit without properly updated software (or firmware) could return a properly formatted yet incorrect value for GPS time, and this problem is independent of the quality of the geolocation data?
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Apr 8 at 5:10
2
$begingroup$
@uhoh Correct. If that invalid time is used for purposes that require accurate time for security, this could result in a security issue.
$endgroup$
– forest
Apr 8 at 5:12
$begingroup$
thanks! fyi Does GPS spoofing ever come from space? How are spoofings usually detected? is somewhat security-related.
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Apr 8 at 5:24
1
1
$begingroup$
To double check, a GPS receiver unit without properly updated software (or firmware) could return a properly formatted yet incorrect value for GPS time, and this problem is independent of the quality of the geolocation data?
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Apr 8 at 5:10
$begingroup$
To double check, a GPS receiver unit without properly updated software (or firmware) could return a properly formatted yet incorrect value for GPS time, and this problem is independent of the quality of the geolocation data?
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Apr 8 at 5:10
2
2
$begingroup$
@uhoh Correct. If that invalid time is used for purposes that require accurate time for security, this could result in a security issue.
$endgroup$
– forest
Apr 8 at 5:12
$begingroup$
@uhoh Correct. If that invalid time is used for purposes that require accurate time for security, this could result in a security issue.
$endgroup$
– forest
Apr 8 at 5:12
$begingroup$
thanks! fyi Does GPS spoofing ever come from space? How are spoofings usually detected? is somewhat security-related.
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Apr 8 at 5:24
$begingroup$
thanks! fyi Does GPS spoofing ever come from space? How are spoofings usually detected? is somewhat security-related.
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Apr 8 at 5:24
add a comment |
$begingroup$
@forest’s answer is correct. But what makes the rollover slightly more problematic is that many GPS receiver manufacturers have accounted for it by pre-programming an internal “pivot date” in the firmware. That is, if a receiver was manufactured/programmed in, say, 2015, then there is internal logic that says “if the date appears to be prior to 2015, it’s obviously nonsense so add 1024 to the apparent week number”. This means the receiver will roll over, just some time in the future, 1024 weeks after the pivot date.
There’s a good explanation here.
This means that most receivers will roll over at different times making it hard to plan for. The date, unless known by the manufacturer, needs to be tested for (using a GPS simulator you need to go way in the future, then in the past, until you can narrow down the actual date).
Location based receivers (car sat navs for example) should continue to function (although their date may be wrong unless fixed in firmware). However, the prevalence of NTP, PTP and other time-of-day protocols in the finance, power, telecom and many other industries, the source of which is almost always traceable back to GPS, makes this a potential headache.
Side note: Some equipment I’m aware of actually rolled over earlier than the 6th April 2019 date, back in 2018. I’m aware of at least one large-ish telecoms provider experiencing a major outage because they hadn’t accounted for it. Their switches all started receiving a time way in the past which caused them to crash.
Further side note: New GPS satellites (i.e. those launched since around 2014 or so) also broadcast a 13-bit week number value. Any receivers designed to utilise them won't roll over for 8191 weeks, or 157 years.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
$endgroup$
– called2voyage♦
Apr 9 at 16:36
add a comment |
$begingroup$
@forest’s answer is correct. But what makes the rollover slightly more problematic is that many GPS receiver manufacturers have accounted for it by pre-programming an internal “pivot date” in the firmware. That is, if a receiver was manufactured/programmed in, say, 2015, then there is internal logic that says “if the date appears to be prior to 2015, it’s obviously nonsense so add 1024 to the apparent week number”. This means the receiver will roll over, just some time in the future, 1024 weeks after the pivot date.
There’s a good explanation here.
This means that most receivers will roll over at different times making it hard to plan for. The date, unless known by the manufacturer, needs to be tested for (using a GPS simulator you need to go way in the future, then in the past, until you can narrow down the actual date).
Location based receivers (car sat navs for example) should continue to function (although their date may be wrong unless fixed in firmware). However, the prevalence of NTP, PTP and other time-of-day protocols in the finance, power, telecom and many other industries, the source of which is almost always traceable back to GPS, makes this a potential headache.
Side note: Some equipment I’m aware of actually rolled over earlier than the 6th April 2019 date, back in 2018. I’m aware of at least one large-ish telecoms provider experiencing a major outage because they hadn’t accounted for it. Their switches all started receiving a time way in the past which caused them to crash.
Further side note: New GPS satellites (i.e. those launched since around 2014 or so) also broadcast a 13-bit week number value. Any receivers designed to utilise them won't roll over for 8191 weeks, or 157 years.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
$endgroup$
– called2voyage♦
Apr 9 at 16:36
add a comment |
$begingroup$
@forest’s answer is correct. But what makes the rollover slightly more problematic is that many GPS receiver manufacturers have accounted for it by pre-programming an internal “pivot date” in the firmware. That is, if a receiver was manufactured/programmed in, say, 2015, then there is internal logic that says “if the date appears to be prior to 2015, it’s obviously nonsense so add 1024 to the apparent week number”. This means the receiver will roll over, just some time in the future, 1024 weeks after the pivot date.
There’s a good explanation here.
This means that most receivers will roll over at different times making it hard to plan for. The date, unless known by the manufacturer, needs to be tested for (using a GPS simulator you need to go way in the future, then in the past, until you can narrow down the actual date).
Location based receivers (car sat navs for example) should continue to function (although their date may be wrong unless fixed in firmware). However, the prevalence of NTP, PTP and other time-of-day protocols in the finance, power, telecom and many other industries, the source of which is almost always traceable back to GPS, makes this a potential headache.
Side note: Some equipment I’m aware of actually rolled over earlier than the 6th April 2019 date, back in 2018. I’m aware of at least one large-ish telecoms provider experiencing a major outage because they hadn’t accounted for it. Their switches all started receiving a time way in the past which caused them to crash.
Further side note: New GPS satellites (i.e. those launched since around 2014 or so) also broadcast a 13-bit week number value. Any receivers designed to utilise them won't roll over for 8191 weeks, or 157 years.
$endgroup$
@forest’s answer is correct. But what makes the rollover slightly more problematic is that many GPS receiver manufacturers have accounted for it by pre-programming an internal “pivot date” in the firmware. That is, if a receiver was manufactured/programmed in, say, 2015, then there is internal logic that says “if the date appears to be prior to 2015, it’s obviously nonsense so add 1024 to the apparent week number”. This means the receiver will roll over, just some time in the future, 1024 weeks after the pivot date.
There’s a good explanation here.
This means that most receivers will roll over at different times making it hard to plan for. The date, unless known by the manufacturer, needs to be tested for (using a GPS simulator you need to go way in the future, then in the past, until you can narrow down the actual date).
Location based receivers (car sat navs for example) should continue to function (although their date may be wrong unless fixed in firmware). However, the prevalence of NTP, PTP and other time-of-day protocols in the finance, power, telecom and many other industries, the source of which is almost always traceable back to GPS, makes this a potential headache.
Side note: Some equipment I’m aware of actually rolled over earlier than the 6th April 2019 date, back in 2018. I’m aware of at least one large-ish telecoms provider experiencing a major outage because they hadn’t accounted for it. Their switches all started receiving a time way in the past which caused them to crash.
Further side note: New GPS satellites (i.e. those launched since around 2014 or so) also broadcast a 13-bit week number value. Any receivers designed to utilise them won't roll over for 8191 weeks, or 157 years.
edited Apr 9 at 6:22
answered Apr 8 at 6:17
DarrenDarren
41115
41115
$begingroup$
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
$endgroup$
– called2voyage♦
Apr 9 at 16:36
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
$endgroup$
– called2voyage♦
Apr 9 at 16:36
$begingroup$
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
$endgroup$
– called2voyage♦
Apr 9 at 16:36
$begingroup$
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
$endgroup$
– called2voyage♦
Apr 9 at 16:36
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Other answers explain the WNRO problem as an overflow/high order truncation/rollover problem.
This is correct.
It is a security issue because services may be impacted. Not all security issues are about data loss. Business continuity is strangely important to people as well.
This type of thing has been going on in the digital world for a while now.
Windows 95, 98 and possibly NT 3.51 would crash on millis rollover after 49.7 days.
The real time clock in many early PC motherboards could only cope with an 8 year range, (3 bits) putting a ceiling on the date (1987 for many 8086's).
Enough has been written about Y2K and tm_year from time.h (which did not rollover but got fat). I recall too we had a post Y2K issue with packed decimal (COMP-3) date arithmetic in point of sale systems world wide.
The important thing is that it is foreseeable, so it should be dealt with by software, almanac data, and appliances that depend upon it.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Other answers explain the WNRO problem as an overflow/high order truncation/rollover problem.
This is correct.
It is a security issue because services may be impacted. Not all security issues are about data loss. Business continuity is strangely important to people as well.
This type of thing has been going on in the digital world for a while now.
Windows 95, 98 and possibly NT 3.51 would crash on millis rollover after 49.7 days.
The real time clock in many early PC motherboards could only cope with an 8 year range, (3 bits) putting a ceiling on the date (1987 for many 8086's).
Enough has been written about Y2K and tm_year from time.h (which did not rollover but got fat). I recall too we had a post Y2K issue with packed decimal (COMP-3) date arithmetic in point of sale systems world wide.
The important thing is that it is foreseeable, so it should be dealt with by software, almanac data, and appliances that depend upon it.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Other answers explain the WNRO problem as an overflow/high order truncation/rollover problem.
This is correct.
It is a security issue because services may be impacted. Not all security issues are about data loss. Business continuity is strangely important to people as well.
This type of thing has been going on in the digital world for a while now.
Windows 95, 98 and possibly NT 3.51 would crash on millis rollover after 49.7 days.
The real time clock in many early PC motherboards could only cope with an 8 year range, (3 bits) putting a ceiling on the date (1987 for many 8086's).
Enough has been written about Y2K and tm_year from time.h (which did not rollover but got fat). I recall too we had a post Y2K issue with packed decimal (COMP-3) date arithmetic in point of sale systems world wide.
The important thing is that it is foreseeable, so it should be dealt with by software, almanac data, and appliances that depend upon it.
$endgroup$
Other answers explain the WNRO problem as an overflow/high order truncation/rollover problem.
This is correct.
It is a security issue because services may be impacted. Not all security issues are about data loss. Business continuity is strangely important to people as well.
This type of thing has been going on in the digital world for a while now.
Windows 95, 98 and possibly NT 3.51 would crash on millis rollover after 49.7 days.
The real time clock in many early PC motherboards could only cope with an 8 year range, (3 bits) putting a ceiling on the date (1987 for many 8086's).
Enough has been written about Y2K and tm_year from time.h (which did not rollover but got fat). I recall too we had a post Y2K issue with packed decimal (COMP-3) date arithmetic in point of sale systems world wide.
The important thing is that it is foreseeable, so it should be dealt with by software, almanac data, and appliances that depend upon it.
answered Apr 9 at 1:50
mckenzmmckenzm
1211
1211
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Space Exploration Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fspace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f35362%2fwhat-is-gps-19-year-rollover-and-does-it-present-a-cybersecurity-issue%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
3
$begingroup$
@JörgWMittag you are right, it last happened in 1999. However, the prevalence and use of GPS back then was nothing like it is now.
$endgroup$
– Darren
Apr 8 at 16:51
1
$begingroup$
@JörgWMittag in fact, that is stated in the article. Also, as per my answer, the date itself may not be a problem, but going forward various receivers may experience problems at unknown and seeminly arbitrary dates.
$endgroup$
– Darren
Apr 8 at 18:23
1
$begingroup$
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
$endgroup$
– called2voyage♦
Apr 9 at 16:32
1
$begingroup$
Delorme did this. They rolled over sometime in the summer of 2018. As a navigation user, I didn't notice it while using my GPS on a 1 week trip. It mucks up the track data however, and you have to do date math, or use a program like GPSBabel to fix the dates. Garmin has since released firmware version 3.7 which fixes the problem.
$endgroup$
– Sherwood Botsford
Apr 12 at 15:36
1
$begingroup$
I didn't need to use GPSbabel, as the track data wasn't date crucial. I haven't checked the GPS to see if data that was on it was modified. I don't think it would be.
$endgroup$
– Sherwood Botsford
Apr 13 at 22:06